Re: Yet more reports
On Fri, 2003-09-19 at 22:45, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 03:04:36PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > - Interestingly, sarge's failures are nearly an order of magnitude
> > higher than woody's, which was an unexpected result. I'm going to see
> > what happened.
>
> 520|370 1 00032590 2 1|Effective UID returned (1001) not equal to VSX_UID1 (1002
>
> Those sort of bugs happen when you use "su" to become the vsx user instead
> of logging in as it, IIRC. I found the most reliable way to run the tests
> was logging in at the console as vsx0 (?) and running the test by hand.
Actually, these runs were under ssh, as in "ssh vsx0@<testbox>".
What's really weird: my last sarge test run (on the 19th) doubled the
number of failures from the previous run (1669 total). This was:
- logged in to vc1 as vsx0
- running the kernel from kernel-image-2.4.21-5-586tsc
The predominant error was the same as you identified: the effective UID
and GID were wrong.
> > - I'm using the newest test suite.
>
> You need to be running a more recent kernel than 2.4.18-bf2.4 to get useful
> results. kernel-image-2.4.22-i386 should hit testing tomorrow.
I'll get that, do a dist-upgrade, and run another test, after poking
around for any obvious problems with the test suite that would cause the
UID problem.
Reply to: